This Blog is a part of my media social experiment. Comments, suggestions and questions are welcome (vv.free.physics@gmail.com). For the specific lists of posts use links on the right. For consulting services of Education Advancement Professionals visit www.GoMars.xyz. Thank you for visiting, Dr. Valentin Voroshilov.

Seven statements we lay down below represent in
a concentrated manner the Vygotski’s idea of a zone of
proximal development (ZPD) and can be seen as a basis for
constructing pedagogical (teaching and diagnostic) procedures aimed at the
development of a child while teaching.

Reconstruction of the Vygotski’s view and projecting
it onto the pedagogical application of a zone of proximal development principle
leads to the following statements:

1. The first assignment
(problem) which a child cannot solve on
his/her own represents the boundary between a zone of actual
development and a zone of proximal development. It does not make a difference
if this is happening under natural circumstances or during the artificial
procedure to diagnose the level of child development.

2. When a child cannot solve a problem he/she is in a
problematic situation (the goal of a teacher is creating a
sequence of problematic situations and guiding students through them).

3. When in a problematic situation, a child solves a
problem by communicating with an adult (expert).

4. From this point of view childdevelopment is
a process during which a child undergoes a transition from a mutual work with
an adult solving together difficult problems to being able to solve problems
independently from adults. The fact this transition happens is also a measure
of how effective the help of the adult was: if today a child can alone solve
problems which he/she could solve before only with a help from adult, that
means the help was effective. If the transition did not happen, that means the
adult should think again about the teaching methods he/she uses.

5. It is clear that the region of the zone within
which development is growing has another boundary; beyond that boundary lay the
problems which a child cannot solve even with the help from an adult. We see
that the zone of proximal development is a region having to limits: an upper
limit beyond which lay problems too difficult for a child even with a helping
adult; and a lower limit beyond which lay problems the child can do without an
adult.

6. A zone of proximal development represents an
assembly of specific actions; a child can understand what they mean and how
they work but cannot implement without help; i.e. this is a zone within which a
child acts meaningfully but with a help of an adult. If a child cannot
understand an adult and cannot act in a meaningful manner there is no
communication and there is no real mutual work of a child and an adult.

7. Finally, we should mention that Vygotski himself
though of the zone of proximal development as applicable beyond just
intellectual skills of a person.

The next area of discussion can be related to two
questions:

1. What kind of a help can and should be used by an
adult helping a child in a problematic situation.

2. A look at contemporary teaching methods and
techniques from the Vygotski’s point of view on a zone of proximal development.

For the deeper view on the applications of
the Vygotski's ideas to designing teaching
and learning practices, please, read

P.S. The above is the direct translation
of the piece which have been written about 5 years ago.

My personal view on ZPD is very similar. A student has entered ZPD when:1. he or she does NOT perform a TASK but has to solve a problem (very briefly: " task" - when one knows what and how to do to achieve the goal; "a problem" - when one does not know how to achieve the goal (at least in full); more on this difference here, and here and here; I hope some day in the future I will finally write one large paper on ZPD).2. he or she has the most of knowledge and skills and experience to understand the solution if it would have been presented by a teacher;3. he or she can construct the solution with the guidance from a teacher within a reasonable time and with a reasonable effort from the student, and the help of a teacher should not be negligible and dominating.Since the solution has to be constructed, a student most probably will be making mistakes.True (actual, full, complete) learning cannot happen without making mistakes.Mistakes are inevitable and unavoidable.There is no shame in making a mistake.There is shame, though, in insisting that you didn't, when even you already know that you did.A culture where mistake are being punished cannot succeed in Science, Technologies, Engineering, and Mathematics (and intellectually in general; but, keep in mind, that "grading" is not necessary "punishment").Any assessment can be described by a set of parameters, including "difficulty" or "hardness". Only specific values of this parameter (harder than "too easy", but easier than "too hard") would place the assignment into ZPD of a student.This is just a fact, that the same assignments (e.g. physics problems) may be too easy
for some students and too difficult for other students. In
both cases the learning is not happening, because a student
did not have to learn anything, or could not learn anything. Hence, when
designing teaching practice, a teacher has to manage the difficulty of
the assignments - for all students - making assignment not
too easy and not too hard, i.e. placing them in ZPD of the students. How to do
it, and what do to if that is not a case is a completely different conversation.

Just do not forget that teachers also have
their own Zone of Proximal Development (even though, you will not find
this statement anywhere else).